| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <49ABF7DF.8060302@mlbassoc.com> Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 08:14:39 -0700 From: Gary Thomas <gary@...assoc.com> To: jdb@...x.dk CC: Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@...tstofly.org>, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...u.dk>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Marvell 88E609x switch? Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 11:56 +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > >> You should write 0x003E ... see attached patch > > Ups, I see (from the thread) that you have already done/tried this... > Yes, although I think it will need some work in the future (I've set it to 1000Mb connection, you said you used 100Mb, etc) Question: I'm testing this by trying a ping out of my box. Linux replies by sending an ARP packet out, and the destination replies with an ARP packet in. I can see from the ethtool stats that the reply packets get into lan1.1 (the physical port I'm using), but I don't see them get moved through the CPU port. My understanding is that this should work via the VLAN map? I checked that setup and it looks OK. Any ideas where this might be going wrong? Thanks -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Gary Thomas | Consulting for the MLB Associates | Embedded world ------------------------------------------------------------ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists